XY DLC for Pokémon: What are your thoughts on all the new possibilities?

[DorianBlack]

RE: What do you think about DLC for Pokemon X/Y ?

And as I've said in the past, having DLC also leaves out customers who don't have easy access to a wireless connection.

That's nothing new, they've been missing out on event Pokemon and the Dream World as well.

But don't you think that's just a little different from the whole new areas, sidequests, and previously unannounced Pokémon that a lot of people in this thread are suggesting?

 

[NoDice]

RE: What do you think about DLC for Pokemon X/Y ?

That's nothing new, they've been missing out on event Pokemon and the Dream World as well.

But don't you think that's just a little different from the whole new areas, sidequests, and previously unannounced Pokémon that a lot of people in this thread are suggesting?

As far as that goes, people have been missing out on Wifi-tickets/event mons' for event related Pokemon and areas(Victini's ticket) for at least a generation now. Not to mention all the exclusive move Pokemon and legendaries given out via Wifi over the last 2 generations.

I think in the same vein as the "Keys" in B2W2 and specific events, Im sure if the DLC was indeed free, they would be able to update another players game via IR or wireless if it encountered another game with updated fixes or Pokedex data. This also reminds me of the berry fix for R/S that was released with FRLG. So its not entirely impossible that people would miss out on free DLC, or at the very least, their Pokedex and game could be updated to include the "BRAND NEW" Pokemon, and the new areas could be transferred as well. If it were indeed brand new data and not like the current "unlocked" style of DLC, there would need to be a prompt so that when transferring both players knew not to interrupt it.

Also! Another thing is- There are many, many businesses nowadays that have wifi hot spots(Starbucks, McDonalds, and hell, my local hospital has Wifi in the lobby too!). So, chances are, if you cant connect to the GTS or get the DLC/event at home, you could find a place to connect for free (or a friends house or something). This isnt the 1990s.

 

[Bolt the Cat]

RE: What do you think about DLC for Pokemon X/Y ?

But don't you think that's just a little different from the whole new areas, sidequests, and previously unannounced Pokémon that a lot of people in this thread are suggesting?

As long as they're not missing out on anything too important, it doesn't really matter. The only time DLC is really a problem is when the standalone game feels less complete as a result.

 

[Dan32]

RE: What do you think about DLC for Pokemon X/Y ?

But don't you think that's just a little different from the whole new areas, sidequests, and previously unannounced Pokémon that a lot of people in this thread are suggesting?

As far as that goes, people have been missing out on Wifi-tickets/event mons' for event related Pokemon and areas(Victini's ticket) for at least a generation now. Not to mention all the exclusive move Pokemon and legendaries given out via Wifi over the last 2 generations.

I think in the same vein as the "Keys" in B2W2 and specific events, Im sure if the DLC was indeed free, they would be able to update another players game via IR or wireless if it encountered another game with updated fixes or Pokedex data. This also reminds me of the berry fix for R/S that was released with FRLG. So its not entirely impossible that people would miss out on free DLC, or at the very least, their Pokedex and game could be updated to include the "BRAND NEW" Pokemon, and the new areas could be transferred as well. If it were indeed brand new data and not like the current "unlocked" style of DLC, there would need to be a prompt so that when transferring both players knew not to interrupt it.

Also! Another thing is- There are many, many businesses nowadays that have wifi hot spots(Starbucks, McDonalds, and hell, my local hospital has Wifi in the lobby too!). So, chances are, if you cant connect to the GTS or get the DLC/event at home, you could find a place to connect for free (or a friends house or something). This isnt the 1990s.

My house hold has had an internet connection for many years now, but I have never gotten myself an event pokemon.

 

[Fee]

RE: What do you think about DLC for Pokemon X/Y ?

But don't you think that's just a little different from the whole new areas, sidequests, and previously unannounced Pokémon that a lot of people in this thread are suggesting?

As long as they're not missing out on anything too important, it doesn't really matter. The only time DLC is really a problem is when the standalone game feels less complete as a result.

It always feels less complete as a result. Even those events made it feel less complete.

 

[Card Slinger J]

RE: What do you think about DLC for Pokemon X/Y ?

I'm down for DLC's in the Pokemon video games as long as it comes with a cheap price tag. I just hope that If Nintendo and Game Freak does this that they don't follow in Capcom's footsteps from what they've been doing in terms of DLC shenanigans especially other video game developers and companies that have been doing horrible with DLC as well.

 

[s2daam]

RE: What do you think about DLC for Pokemon X/Y ?

I'm down for DLC's in the Pokemon video games as long as it comes with a cheap price tag. I just hope that If Nintendo and Game Freak does this that they don't follow in Capcom's footsteps from what they've been doing in terms of DLC shenanigans especially other video game developers and companies that have been doing horrible with DLC as well.

I'm pretty sure Masuda said he doesn't want players to pay more for bits of the game after they paid for the full game, so I don't think GameFreak would charge - or atleast, if they did, it wouldn't be much at all.

 

[Bolt the Cat]

RE: What do you think about DLC for Pokemon X/Y ?

It always feels less complete as a result. Even those events made it feel less complete.

No it doesn't. It only feels less complete when content that is normally put in the game is locked as DLC. If the normal game content is the same, but they just add stuff on top of it, then the DLC actually adds something to the game.

 

[Thunderfox]

RE: What do you think about DLC for Pokemon X/Y ?

I will always and forever point out Fire Emblem:Awakening as an example of DLC done right. Though the exact model doesn't really work for Pokemon

 

[Fee]

RE: What do you think about DLC for Pokemon X/Y ?

It always feels less complete as a result. Even those events made it feel less complete.

No it doesn't. It only feels less complete when content that is normally put in the game is locked as DLC. If the normal game content is the same, but they just add stuff on top of it, then the DLC actually adds something to the game.

I still feel the same. All DLC is a part of the game, whether it's an extra part or not. It's still there and it'll still be missing if you don't have it. I will admit it's not as bad as the events though. It's not that I feel DLC adds nothing new it's that I feel that it's a part of the game that I don't have.

---

I will always and forever point out Fire Emblem:Awakening as an example of DLC done right. Though the exact model doesn't really work for Pokemon

Really? How? Like honestly how? From the outside it looks like they put way too much DLC in that game. Altogether it costs more than the game itself. (and that's at a discounted price) Also if I remember correctly the DLC was released in pretty quick succession so it was probably held back from the main game as well...course I'm not sure about this. Feel free to explain why you think it was done right/correct me...

 

[professorlight]

RE: What do you think about DLC for Pokemon X/Y ?

I still feel the same. All DLC is a part of the game, whether it's an extra part or not. It's still there and it'll still be missing if you don't have it. I will admit it's not as bad as the events though. It's not that I feel DLC adds nothing new it's that I feel that it's a part of the game that I don't have.

"It's not that I feel DLC adds nothing new it's that I feel that it's a part of the game that I don't have."

Exactly. This sums up what I couldn't properly express in my previous posts. Now you have DLC, but in two, five, ten years, you don't have DLC; and when those DLC are more than a cosmetic item, a special weapon or a non-necessary extra character, it hurts the game, because you'll never play it whole again. All complex DLC is detrimental to the experience, because it, by merely existing devalues the content you alerady have and paid, which, becomes incomplete.

 

[Dan32]

RE: What do you think about DLC for Pokemon X/Y ?

In some countries I hear Internet connectivity is a legal right and cannot be denied to anyone.

I vote for as much free DLC as the designers see fit for their game and I hope loyal players who may not have access to these extra's do not take it to heart because the majority are happy.

If they would like to open a clothes store and charge money for special clothes and accessories for your characters then I guess it would be ok, but charging for anything else and I would have a problem.

 

[CaseyVGCx]

Re: What do you think about DLC for Pokemon X/Y ?

If this game were to have DLC,then this game is going to have a long cycle,and the release date for the next game will probably be longer.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 2

 

[Reggie McGigas]

RE: What do you think about DLC for Pokemon X/Y ?

I really hope that we don't get dlc, in game purchases suck and de-grade a game's value. .

 

[Bolt the Cat]

RE: What do you think about DLC for Pokemon X/Y ?

"It's not that I feel DLC adds nothing new it's that I feel that it's a part of the game that I don't have."

Exactly. This sums up what I couldn't properly express in my previous posts. Now you have DLC, but in two, five, ten years, you don't have DLC; and when those DLC are more than a cosmetic item, a special weapon or a non-necessary extra character, it hurts the game, because you'll never play it whole again. All complex DLC is detrimental to the experience, because it, by merely existing devalues the content you alerady have and paid, which, becomes incomplete.

This is a very selfish perception of DLC, you expect a game to be shipped all in one piece despite the cost, the effort put into it, and the amount of content you're getting. You have to remember, video games are business, developers are in it to make money. So how can they make money if they're making all of this new content for free just so you don't complain about the game not being "complete"?

Furthermore, the premise that the game is not "complete" without DLC is not quite right, because that depends on how much content is included with the standalone game. If you're still getting at least the same amount of content as you were before, but the DLC is giving you more, you have no right to complain. The DLC is completely optional. If you're against spending extra money in your game, feel free not to buy it. The value of your game doesn't magically decrease because they added extra features, that value is fixed when the standalone game is shipped.

 

[professorlight]

RE: What do you think about DLC for Pokemon X/Y ?

"It's not that I feel DLC adds nothing new it's that I feel that it's a part of the game that I don't have."

Exactly. This sums up what I couldn't properly express in my previous posts. Now you have DLC, but in two, five, ten years, you don't have DLC; and when those DLC are more than a cosmetic item, a special weapon or a non-necessary extra character, it hurts the game, because you'll never play it whole again. All complex DLC is detrimental to the experience, because it, by merely existing devalues the content you alerady have and paid, which, becomes incomplete.

This is a very selfish perception of DLC, you expect a game to be shipped all in one piece despite the cost, the effort put into it, and the amount of content you're getting. You have to remember, video games are business, developers are in it to make money. So how can they make money if they're making all of this new content for free just so you don't complain about the game not being "complete"?

Furthermore, the premise that the game is not "complete" without DLC is not quite right, because that depends on how much content is included with the standalone game. If you're still getting at least the same amount of content as you were before, but the DLC is giving you more, you have no right to complain. The DLC is completely optional. If you're against spending extra money in your game, feel free not to buy it. The value of your game doesn't magically decrease because they added extra features, that value is fixed when the standalone game is shipped.

How exactly did you managed to misinterpret everything I've said? And here I thought I was being as clear as I could be.

I haven't even mention paid or free DLC. that's a moot point in my argument.
I'm not against extra content for released games, I have owned several expansion packs over the years, and I consider Mysteries of the sith (an expansion pack), to be one of the best games ever despite being awfully short.
I'm against extra content with an EXPIRATION DATE.
The difference between an exp. pack and DLC is that you buy your expansion pack and it's yours. you win, the developer wins, all happy. with DLC, you buy a digital license for some extra content which will be unavailable eventually, and if you lost it and can't buy it again, tough luck. So, you don't win, the developer wins a little.
You can use a DVD whenever the hell you want. not a DLC.

Furthermore, the premise that the game is not "complete" without DLC is not quite right, because that depends on how much content is included with the standalone game. If you're still getting at least the same amount of content as you were before, but the DLC is giving you more, you have no right to complain. The DLC is completely optional. If you're against spending extra money in your game, feel free not to buy it. The value of your game doesn't magically decrease because they added extra features, that value is fixed when the standalone game is shipped.

I already answered that:

All complex DLC is detrimental to the experience, because it, by merely existing devalues the content you alerady have and paid, which, becomes incomplete.

By "complex", I meant anything RELEVANT to the story. In Assassins creed 2, the DLC "the bonfire of vanities" intoduced the moving (for you and ezio) death of a main character, and one of the single best cutscenes in the history of videogames, showing ezio's growth throughout the game, and how much he changed. If you think that doesn't affect the value of the game's story, then I'll sell you my copy of "harry potter and the prince of secrets" or whatever. The chapter where dumbledore dies is missing, but I can get it to you for a small price.

 

[Bolt the Cat]

RE: What do you think about DLC for Pokemon X/Y ?

I haven't even mention paid or free DLC. that's a moot point in my argument.
I'm not against extra content for released games, I have owned several expansion packs over the years, and I consider Mysteries of the sith (an expansion pack), to be one of the best games ever despite being awfully short.
I'm against extra content with an EXPIRATION DATE.
The difference between an exp. pack and DLC is that you buy your expansion pack and it's yours. you win, the developer wins, all happy. with DLC, you buy a digital license for some extra content which will be unavailable eventually, and if you lost it and can't buy it again, tough luck. So, you don't win, the developer wins a little.
You can use a DVD whenever the hell you want. not a DLC.

Most DLC isn't limited availability, and I'm inclined to believe that if Game Freak were to put up DLC that adds significant value to the game, they won't be that stupid. At any rate, you still don't lose because you've lost nothing from the game. You just don't get the bonus content.

I already answered that:

All complex DLC is detrimental to the experience, because it, by merely existing devalues the content you alerady have and paid, which, becomes incomplete.

By "complex", I meant anything RELEVANT to the story. In Assassins creed 2, the DLC "the bonfire of vanities" intoduced the moving (for you and ezio) death of a main character, and one of the single best cutscenes in the history of videogames, showing ezio's growth throughout the game, and how much he changed. If you think that doesn't affect the value of the game's story, then I'll sell you my copy of "harry potter and the prince of secrets" or whatever. The chapter where dumbledore dies is missing, but I can get it to you for a small price.

All right, I'm not really familiar with either of these storylines, so I can't really say much about this, but what little I know about these two series is enough to say that analogy doesn't hold. Assassin's Creed III is a completely different plotline, so I don't think that DLC pack would be necessary for the plot. The character development isn't exactly essential to the plot, and I highly doubt any of the characters show up in III or IV unless they somehow survive for 300 years. Whereas Dumbledore's death in the Half Blood Prince has much more of an effect on the plot because Deathly Hallows takes place where Half Blood Prince ends.

 

[Tatertot]

RE: What do you think about DLC for Pokemon X/Y ?

If they do decide to include DLC, they had better make it available between different save files. For example, you buy the DLC for the Hoenn region expansion pack (Farfetch'd, I know), but you start over a new save file. When you reach a certain point in your adventure, you should still have access to the Hoenn region. The one thing that bugged me about HG/SS is that now when I go back to play through them again, I am unable to get the Spiky-Eared Pichu or Lv. 1 Creation Trio because there is no way (other than cheating) to get the event pokemon necessary to activate the in-game event. If there are exclusive areas and pokemon given out for X and Y, there should be some way to access the same content years later, so that the replay value is not lessened.

In all honesty, I really don't think Gamefreak is going to include DLC other than the usual mystery gift event stuff. None of Nintendo's core games thus far have had any substantial DLC, and (don't shoot me on this) I believe Nintendo's president has made a statement before saying they have no intention of including DLC in their games. (I read this on a forum post by the webmaster of a website and forum whose mascot is a green grass/psychic pokemon, if you catch my drift)

 

[Bolt the Cat]

RE: What do you think about DLC for Pokemon X/Y ?

In all honesty, I really don't think Gamefreak is going to include DLC other than the usual mystery gift event stuff. None of Nintendo's core games thus far have had any substantial DLC, and (don't shoot me on this) I believe Nintendo's president has made a statement before saying they have no intention of including DLC in their games. (I read this on a forum post by the webmaster of a website and forum whose mascot is a green grass/psychic pokemon, if you catch my drift)

New Super Luigi U says hi.

Nintendo hasn't done DLC because they're consoles didn't support it until now, simple as that.

 

[professorlight]

RE: What do you think about DLC for Pokemon X/Y ?

Most DLC isn't limited availability, and I'm inclined to believe that if Game Freak were to put up DLC that adds significant value to the game, they won't be that stupid. At any rate, you still don't lose because you've lost nothing from the game. You just don't get the bonus content.

DLC as we are discussing here is a relatively recent invention, we still don't know the reach of this trend, or for how long exactly it can be available.I don't think it will last long.
And bonus content is still content, by your definition, when you watch the avengers, the theater should charge you extra if you stay after the credits for the shawarma scene. As I said, bonus content is still content, therefore part of the product.

All right, I'm not really familiar with either of these storylines, so I can't really say much about this, but what little I know about these two series is enough to say that analogy doesn't hold. Assassin's Creed III is a completely different plotline, so I don't think that DLC pack would be necessary for the plot. The character development isn't exactly essential to the plot, and I highly doubt any of the characters show up in III or IV unless they somehow survive for 300 years. Whereas Dumbledore's death in the Half Blood Prince has much more of an effect on the plot because Deathly Hallows takes place where Half Blood Prince ends.

I didn't even mention AC III, I was talking of AC II's story only, and how a very important part of the character of ezio is shown in content that won't be available for all players. Besides, by your own admission you don't know about those storylines, so you have no grounds to tell me the analogy doesn't hold.
Character development is essential in good storytelling, it's what makes you feel closer to the characters, and motivates you to move on in the plot. Theoretically you can have a game with no character development whatsoever, since games are inherently different from books or movies, but it would be very very poor, especially compared to the paragons of storytelling in videogames we have now: mass effect I/II/III, tomb raider 2013, uncharted, AC II, planescape: torment, KOTOR, deus ex, batman arkham series, metal gear solid, spec ops: the line, the ending to call of duty: modern warfare III, (I could do this all day).
And you seem to have misunderstood my satirical commentary on the nature of complex DLC using the harry potter series as a medium.